This Isn’t About Standards. It’s About Suppressing Women in the Military

Today, I want to share some thoughts about what we keep hearing in the media—that we need to raise the standards in the military and revive lethality and the Warrior Ethos.

By the way, for those who may not know, here is the U.S. Army Warrior Ethos:1

  • I will always place the mission first.
  • I will never accept defeat.
  • I will never quit.
  • I will never leave a fallen comrade.

Lethality according to the Merriam Webster dictionary is: capable of causing death.2

There is no need to “revive” the Warrior Ethos3—it never died. It remains the foundation of our military. What we really need to remember is that the military continues to uphold the Warrior Ethos, often to the very end. It’s the politicians and elected officials who repeatedly fail to live up to it, leaving the military hanging due to indecision. Too many examples to list here.

Returning to the subject of standards. Apparently, the Department of Defense wants all military services to identify Combat Arms vs. Non-Combat Arms occupations, and also to set sex-neutral standards. The instruction states:

“All entry-level and sustained physical fitness requirements within combat arms positions must be sex-neutral, based solely on the operational demands of the occupation and the readiness needed to confront any adversary.”4

This kind of directive is the kind that frustrates the military. Instead of focusing on training and equipment maintenance, staff—thousands across all branches—are now expected to work on something that’s been clear for years.

Here are the Combat Arms branches (those whose soldiers are directly involved in actual fighting) in the U.S. Army: Air Defense Artillery, Armor, Aviation, Corps of Engineers, Cyber, Field Artillery, Infantry, and Special Forces.5

Also, while physical fitness standards are defined, there’s a longstanding joke in the military: every time there’s a change in leadership, the standard changes too—because the new leader needs something notable to include in their annual evaluation. So, the standards change constantly. And now, apparently, they’re about to change again—for the worse—because there seems to be a hidden agenda to eliminate as many women from leadership positions as possible.

There’s a long history in the military of limiting women’s access to promotions and senior ranks. In the Army, the issue stemmed from men in Armor, Field Artillery, Infantry, and Special Forces being promoted to general officer ranks and occupying top leadership roles, while women in Air Defense Artillery, Aviation, and Corps of Engineers were left behind. To address this, pressure was applied to open more combat arms roles to women, increasing their chances for promotion. That’s why you now see women in the Infantry and Field Artillery. Recently, we’ve heard about women passing Ranger School and earning the coveted Ranger Tab (an identification that the military wears in their uniforms). For context, Rangers are a specialized Infantry force but you can read more here.

Over the weekend, I told my wife that the Department of Defense wants to “set new physical fitness standards” that are the same for men and women. I said it’s a joke—and that what we’ll likely see is more men failing whatever that new standard ends up being, which could affect morale in the long term.

The current standards in the U.S. Army are already adequate for the mission. But for some reason, certain people in the Department of Defense think that everyone in the Armed Forces must be some kind of Ranger or Special Forces operator—ready to fight on short notice anywhere in the world. That idea reflects ignorance and a lack of competency. Ironically, some of the people talking about “lethality” aren’t even Airborne, Ranger, or Special Forces qualified. Not sure what kind of lethality they’re referring to—maybe they’ve watched too many war movies.

I didn’t know it at the time I made that comment to my wife, but I later learned that the Army held its Best Ranger Competition this past weekend—and one of the competing teams included a woman. First Lt. Gabrielle White became the first woman to compete in this grueling event.

Source: Associated Press

This is significant and directly contradicts the idea that we need new standards.

Here’s an overview of the competition:

“Held annually at Fort Benning, the Lt. Gen. David E. Grange Jr. Best Ranger Competition is a three-day challenge to determine the best Ranger-qualified members of the U.S. Armed Forces. The competition features two-person teams who apply their technical knowledge while testing physical and cognitive limits in a series of tactical tasks.”6

Best Ranger Competition Trailer

This year, there were 52 teams. Lt. White and Capt. Seth Deltenre finished 14th7—meaning 38 teams either finished behind them or didn’t finish at all.

https://www.reddit.com/r/army/comments/1jyqliw/2025_best_ranger_final_results/?rdt=53340

Some fun math:

  • 104 competitors = 103 men and 1 woman
  • 52 teams = 51 all-male teams and 1 mixed-gender team
  • Lt. Gabrielle White finished in the top 30%—beating out 76 highly trained Rangers

Clearly, current standards don’t need to change. Not only is Lt. White in top physical condition, but I’m confident she could outperform thousands of men in the Army.

But of course, the new standards aren’t really about fitness. They’re about suppressing women’s participation—and that’s incredibly disappointing.

By the way, I don’t understand the obsession with combat arms and the implication that those roles are only for men. My experience is with the Army, and while the Marines are similar, what about the Air Force and Navy?

Apparently, women can’t be “lethal” in those branches either?

“Combat arms” in the Air Force means flying fighter jets, bombers, or other aircraft that drop munitions. In the Navy, it likely refers to operating destroyers, submarines, or naval aircraft.

So, are women not good enough to fly planes or command ships unless they meet some newly invented, arbitrary fitness standard?

I have no doubt that women are capable of conducting combat operations—they have been for quite some time now.

Women are mentally and physically tough—traits that are, by the way, part of the Army Soldier’s Creed.8 

Men need to understand that women are capable and will succeed no matter how many obstacles we put in their way. 

  1. https://www.army.mil/values/warrior.html ↩︎
  2. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lethal ↩︎
  3. https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/4040940/secretary-hegseths-message-to-the-force/ ↩︎
  4. https://media.defense.gov/2025/Mar/31/2003678527/-1/-1/1/COMBAT-ARMS-STANDARDS.PDF ↩︎
  5. https://api.army.mil/e2/c/downloads/2022/05/24/9513c3e9/chapter-2.pdf ↩︎
  6. https://www.army.mil/ranger/bestranger.html ↩︎
  7. https://apnews.com/article/army-ranger-competition-female-first-7182c5659e04162a4476eae2113b15d7 ↩︎
  8. https://www.army.mil/values/soldiers.html ↩︎

84 thoughts on “This Isn’t About Standards. It’s About Suppressing Women in the Military”

  1. Thank you for your concern for women, Edward. I read this morning there is a new law that will make it more difficult for women, especially remarried and military women, to vote. Proof of birth and current name will need to be provided and some women do not have these certificates. What are your thoughts, Edward?

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Just terrible and I read something similar a few days ago. Punishing women for not having the time to update some paperwork is absurd. The government could easily verify name variations, similar to how a credit report shows all the different names associated with a person. But of course, there’s an agenda behind all that, even though it probably affects both parties equally. In Puerto Rico, women typically do not change their names when they get married.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  2. You summed this up well in a way that you know first hand which I appreciate. I whole heartedly agree with you, Edward!
    “But of course, the new standards aren’t really about fitness. They’re about suppressing women’s participation—and that’s incredibly disappointing.”
    Thanks for calling this out! 💓🙌🏽

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  3. Browsing some of the opinions of your fine post tells me that the notion of equal opportunity doesn’t have much of a chance in the US in the current political climate.
    And, if I paraphrase Petronius and use Australian vernacular, he might have said ‘Every time we get ourselves organised, some dill from head office comes along and completely stuffs things up again’.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you. We are definitely going through some rough times in this country. I really like that paraphrase: ‘Every time we get ourselves organised, some dill from head office comes along and completely stuffs things up again.’ It’s absolutely true.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  4. I didn’t know about the background of this, and I appreciate you writing about it. I agree that it’s disappointing about military leadership aiming to suppress participation by women. To me, that’s small-minded. And you summed up the possibilities very well with that last sentence.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  7. Thank you for the share and for your service, Edward. As you know, it will take me some time to finish reading your post. 😄 I do want to share a quick note, related to the topic. Although I come from a military family, I had no interest. In hindsight it may have been beneficial for me, especially helping to cover college expenses. My brother’s recruiter sure tried to convince me. My brother was in the army for over twenty years. 🫡

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Colonel or General Michele Lee Sefton has a good ring to it! I hear you and the military is definitely a choice that needs to be considered very carefully. It demands a lot of sacrifices. In my view, if a woman or man chooses to serve, then military leaders should provide the space and fairness for their professional development and never discriminate based on race, color, religion, sex, or nationality.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

                    2. I returned to wrap-up my reading. Thank you for this share. I thought about my grandfather’s WWII service when reading the U.S. Army Warrior Ethos and it seems like every new leader, regardless of the entity, feels the need to dismantle and change things. Sometimes it’s needed but it often seems more ego driven.

                      Liked by 2 people

                    3. Absolutely! You don’t change things just because—there needs to be a reason based on analysis, observation, and discussions with the team. In big organizations like the Department of Defense, every little change costs millions in taxpayer money. That’s why a good and competent leader won’t make unnecessary changes. In this case, the changes are driven by ego, which is very dangerous. Thank you for coming back—it’s always a pleasure.

                      Liked by 2 people

  9. Best “last line” I’ve read in a long time, Edward. Thank you for this post and your advocacy. Your leadership about women’s rights. You said two things that will stick with me as insights. Spot-on, I suspect:

    …”what we’ll likely see is more men failing whatever that new standard ends up being…”

    and

    …”the new standards aren’t really about fitness. They’re about suppressing women’s participation—and that’s incredibly disappointing.”

    Thank you for being you. 💕

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. You’re very welcome, Vicki, and thank you for your comments and for highlighting the parts that resonated with you. About that last line—I’ve come to understand over the years, especially during the COVID pandemic, that men often have a harder time adapting to changes in their environment. Most women seem better equipped to handle the toughest circumstances and always find a way forward. Sadly, many men struggle with that, and it takes us longer to find answers. I often think about fathers abandoning their families when things get tough, while mothers carry on and raise their children alone. That always comes to mind when I reflect on the differences between men and women.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. I love how thoughtful you are and appreciate your insights and big heart. Your family – and those you served with (side by side and as a leader) will forever reap the benefits. I know your blogging friends feel that way! 🥰

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

  10. This is so interesting and well written, Edward. Your experience in the Army and as a leader shines through. It seems to me that when we try to pit the sexes against each other, we almost always lose. And your joke captures that same sentiment, “I said it’s a joke—and that what we’ll likely see is more men failing whatever that new standard ends up being, which could affect morale in the long term.”

    Maybe I’m off base but it seems like there’s an air of pay back from all who haven’t succeeded in recent decades. I’m not sure “going back” on any standard will change frustration and attitude. Let’s hope a more moderate course prevails.

    Thanks for this very interesting essay, Edward!

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you, Wynne. I think you’re right about your “payback” comment—it seems to be their main motivation across the board, from the military and universities to state government. Anyone with a differing opinion ends up in the crosshairs. Some of these men aren’t truly successful if you take money out of the equation, and some are so insecure they can’t stand seeing a woman do better than them. That’s a major character flaw, for sure.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. Good point, Edward. If you listen to Richard Reeve of the American Institute for Boys and Men, he has a few interesting reasons why men are suffering. If I recall correctly – boys aren’t doing well on standardized tests like the SAT since they mature later, women are expecting more because they no longer need to be married to be successful, and men aren’t participating in the community as Boy Scout leaders or church leaders or in other ways that help provide companionship and purpose in older years.

        I can’t help but think that we need to be helping people solve those problems instead of trying to go backwards.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        1. Absolutely! I read his book, and I believe he’s spot on. He mentioned the idea of sending boys to school a year later so they’d be more on par with girls in terms of maturity. We did that with our son, and we’re now seeing the benefits as he moves through high school. I’m also glad you mentioned church, because that’s where you really see it on full display. There are several study groups for women, and you’re lucky if there’s even one for men. Instead of learning from how women interact socially and putting some of those things into practice many men fall back on primitive behaviors and try to suppress progress. It’s insane!

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

  12. It is all just a sound bite they created to sound macho. I pay them no mind when they are just blowing wind. It is actions that are screaming at the top of their lungs for us to take notice right now that are causing me so much inner turbulence. If 47 doesn’t watch it, he’s gonna have us in a war where we will be taking anyone who can still stand up to fight- and don’t believe he wouldn’t be praising the female GI at that point in time.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Funny that you mention Sarah Connor—many women are turning to high-intensity interval training (HIIT), and my goodness, this kind of training can get you in great shape in a relatively short time. I believe the same, and I think their changes are going to fail in the long run. Thank you for your comment, Robbie.

      Like

      Reply

  14. An in-depth essay on the ins and outs of the Military Standards. Very well written and unraveled. Any type of segregation is, in my perspective, a red flag. It shows we are going in the opposite direction of our humanitarian nature. These new standards you mentioned are definitely a step back (or several steps back!) on the road of gender equanimity in the military. Something it took many decades to forge. For, ultimately, as you showed well, women’s skills are not in question; only some people’s mental capacities seem to be… and these are the ones making these types of rules. Eventually, it will be dropped (again!), but in truth, it seems like a game of irresponsibility and a waste of time. We could be so much ahead and do so much better! I see these step-backs as human calibration… in time, we will get there. Thank you, Edward, for this analysis and reflection. I appreciate reading it. Sending lots of light and blessings your way 🙏✨ Have a peaceful day 🌈

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you so much for your comment, Susana. Your line about the “game of irresponsibility and a waste of time” is an excellent assessment of what’s going on. We’ll get there eventually—some people are just delaying the inevitable.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  15. That is very interesting! I am reading currently the book Around the world in seventy-two days by Nellie Bly, she did the trip in real life in 1889 when a woman was to stay home, she was a journalist and very interesting what she conquered as a young woman back then. Yet, most people have never heard of her.

    Jules Verne book Around the World in 80 days was of course fiction, but she took the idea from that and even met Jules Verne and his wife on her trip.

    So, as women, we have to keep pioneering through until all the glass ceilings have been broken, right now, it seems the politicians have just loaded on more glass.

    I enjoyed your article Edward!

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you, Melissa. I know some guys are just narrow-minded, but putting up roadblocks to progress just doesn’t make sense. Honestly, I think a lot of them are just scared and that’s really the heart of the issue.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  16. I was a woman in the military but I wasn’t a woman who was once a man in the military, and that’s the current problem. That’s what is being objected to as far as I know.
    I won’t go into my experience in the military, it was mostly positive and I wouldn’t forget it for anything. But there were some things that were a constant fight.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

      1. Ok, I got you. From personal experience—after serving 26+ years as an active duty officer, retiring in 2023, and 6 years as enlisted prior to that—I never served with a man in that situation. I was actually stationed in Virginia back in 2016 when we started tracking Soldiers who were looking into sex change operations. We didn’t have any in my unit, and only had one in my next two assignments.

        There were a little over 1,300 military personnel out of a total force of 2.1 million — about 0.11%. Depending on which source you use, that number ranges from 800 to 1,500, still a really small percentage. I think people tend to exaggerate a bit to push different agendas in the military.

        I don’t see this as a readiness issue. What is a huge issue in the military is sexual assault within the force — 29,000 cases in 2023. To me, that’s the real issue. As an officer and leader, I wasn’t concerned with a Soldier’s sexual preferences. What mattered to me was that they follow the regulations, did their job and served their nation.

        The sports issue is a bit more complicated, since there are men’s teams and women’s teams, so each team needs to figure out what’s acceptable. But the military is one team — and in the case of war, we’re going to be fighting together against a common enemy.

        It’s a little lengthy, but I wanted to share my perspective and personal experience.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        1. I understand, and that other stuff is what I didn’t want to talk about. I had plenty of that and could have opened cases myself, but feared retribution. In any case, I served only 4 1/2 years, and enjoyed traveling to many places and serving my country.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

          1. Sorry to hear that, and thank you for sharing. It’s terrible, and the military would be a better organization if people simply respected one another. But again, that’s a problem affecting other institutions too — including the church.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

  19. Very interesting. And I couldn’t help myself – I looked some stuff up: Here are the current standards and men and women are the same in height, weight and body-fat, I think . (Might be out of date.)

    https://usarmybasic.com/army-physical-fitness/army-height-weight-standards/”

    Congratulations to your female Ranger. I think there will be more because as women are allowed to compete and be active in different things they will, individually and in groups, become better at it.

    Becky

    >

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you for your comments. Men and women have similar standards across the board. When standards are not the same, it’s based on scientific calculations and other factors. You’re absolutely right, and I expect to see more women in these types of competitions in the future.

      Like

      Reply

  23. From my experience women are inferior to men
    When tree planting the average man would plant 1,500 tree’s a day on the prairies while most women would barely plant 1,000. On the west coast there was never any women because the work was too hard
    When fighting forest fires women could not keep up with men
    When I was a teacher in China for ten years the teachers with the highest highest preforming students were always men.
    The best head masters were always men
    I do not believe in the politically correct crap that women are equal to much less superior to men and have many decades of experience to proof it.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. I totally disagree and could probably write a whole book arguing your points, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. Your comments don’t make much sense. Women are not inferior to men; they are, in fact, equal.

      Liked by 4 people

      Reply

    2. “The Lucretius problem, after the Latin poetic philosopher who wrote that the fool believes that the tallest mountain in the world will be equal to the tallest one he has observed.” Our experiences shape our beliefs. If our experiences are limited, our beliefs are limited. If we haven’t seen it, it doesn’t exist. If we haven’t personally witnessed a thing, it never happened.
      I have many decades of experiences that prove men and women are equal. If anyone thinks it’s ‘politically correct crap that women are equal to men’, then try reading the Bible, (it’s nearly Easter, a time when some might consider it).
      When reading the Bible, what we see depends on what we bring to it. I’ve known women who had to fight for their lives. I’ve known women who had to – hunt with guns and bows, forage the forest, protect, work, bring home the money, pay the bills, care for the family and home… Women are the first to rise in the morning and the last to retire for the evening. I’ve watched women be extremely resourceful, while being treated like inferior dogs. I don’t understand the need for Christianity to force the idea that women are inferior in any way to men. Examples in my life disprove the gender ideas that Christianity supposes. In my experiences, we will always be equal teammates. My husband and I are True Love Teammates of 30 years, we see each other as equal and valuable. We love, honor, and cherish each other.
      The New Testament shows that there were more women named as leaders than men. A few Biblical women include: Mary (the mother of Jesus), Martha and Mary, Anna (a prophetess), Priscilla (who is always listed before her husband in their partnership), Lydia (a successful business woman), Phoebe (a diakonos — a “minister,” or “deacon”— of her local church, who carried the most important letter from Paul to the churches of Rome), Lois (Timothy’s grandmother), and Eunice (Timothy’s mother)… There are over 290 women mentioned in the Bible. Even though many translations (there are 450 translations of the Bible in English alone) try to hide and minimize their stories, women still shine through because of their immense strength. Jesus spoke in a thoughtful, caring manner directly to women. Jesus dealt with women as having the personal freedom and enough self-determination to handle their own lives. Jesus broke with biblical traditions, rejecting attempts to devalue the worth of a woman, or her word. Jesus is amazing, he walked with the poor, fed the hungry, healed the sick, and told us to Love One Another! I’ve wanted to be exactly like Jesus since I was 9 years old!
      Paul didn’t discriminate between men and women. Paul saw all Christians as equals.
      If you read the Bible, you’ll see that women won wars and outsmarted opponents. So this nonsense that women shouldn’t be in combat is truly that – Nonsense! Women won wars, not the men hiding in caves, not the men hiding in houses as they threw their daughters and wives out to be raped and tortured… Women win wars.
      A few Women warriors in the Bible: (bravery, strength, and strategic thinking is not an anomaly for women, it’s hard for some to see this because women’s stories of bravery and intelligence are sometimes silenced by boastful jerks who claim women’s ingenuity as their own.). Strong female leadership is nothing new in the Church.
      · Deborah was a warrior who served as the only female judge in a lawless period. Faced with “900 chariots of iron,” Deborah’s army of 10,000 Israelites rushed down from the hills, clashing with the Canaanite general Sisera.
      · Jael was known as a brave and fierce woman warrior. Jael displayed great courage and strategy when she killed Sisera, the commander of the Canaanite army.
      · Esther demonstrated bravery and strategic thinking. She risked her life to save her people from a genocide plot in Persia.
      · Judith bravely beheaded the Assyrian general Holofernes with his own sword, saving her people.
      · Rahab was a prostitute (because in a world that refuses to let women hold the jobs they want and excel at, they’re forced to find some way to survive), not a traditional warrior, but her courageous act of hiding the Israelite spies led to the fall of Jericho.
      · A man named Abimelech set himself up as king and tried to take the town of Thebez. An unnamed woman of Thebez drops a stone on him from a tower. Most people only have room in their heart for one King, and no human will ever compare.
      · Mary Magdalene was one of the few who remained with Jesus during his crucifixion. “But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.”
      Apologies Edward for writing a book length comment. I debated with myself as to whether I should engage, but I just couldn’t let this go without some sort of a response. Please feel free to delete this comment, as this is your blog and you are in charge of what belongs here.
      Your post was fantastic, and I appreciate how you use examples and facts to back it up! Maybe your post is something that should be published in the Military/Army Times or other independent military news source?

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      1. Rose, well said—I agree with you 100%. I couldn’t have said it better myself, so I’m not going to add to such a well-thought-out comment and response. Well done, my friend.

        As for publishing it on a military news source, I’d rather keep it on my blog, where I have control. The internet is a powerful tool, and I’m sure people searching for this topic will find my post. Thank you so much for reading and for your excellent comment.

        Liked by 3 people

        Reply

      2. Dear Edward and Rose,

        Hello! I am enjoying the lively conversations here and have come to join you in reflecting on the significance of this excellent post entitled “This Isn’t About Standards. It’s About Suppressing Women in the Military“. Thank you very much for your respective insights and contributions to the discussions, to which I would like to add as follows.

        The ability of people to secure their livelihood and property via respect and equality has been increasingly fraught with precarious issues and exacerbated by climate change and sociopolitical polarization. It has indeed become one of the major reasons of how and why the likes of the downtrodden, the homeless, the addicts, the lost souls, the poor, the marginalized, the minority, the disenfranchised, the LGBTIQ+ and so on tend to remain stuck in their predicaments.

        On average, the conservatives and the right-wing folks are much more likely to think that the downtrodden, the homeless, the addicts, the lost souls, the poor, the marginalized, the minority, the disenfranchised, and the LGBTIQ+ deserve their own “fate” and “wretchedness”. They are also far more prone to racism, ageism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, and have very problematic views and beliefs about academia, science, immigration, multiculturalism, crime, firearms regulation, national security, religion, abortion, vaccination, genetic evolution, climate change, the environment, the economy, as well as civil and political rights.

        Apart from what Edward has discussed in the post, even just the fallouts of the main event regarding the SCOTUS’ decisions on abortion and its striking down Roe v. Wade can have various implications and ramifications for the following:

        Reproductive freedoms…
        LGBTQ freedoms…
        Contraceptive freedoms…
        Migrants freedoms…
        The freedom of liberty (common sense gun safety, and police reform)…
        The right to vote…

        Indeed, the issues and spectres of continuing or even worsening sexual discrimination and sexual harassment, let alone sexual assault, have plagued many entities or organizations, including the military. They are unlikely to be addressed in full until women have gained equal representations, which their male counterparts have often monopolized. Yet, many challenges remain, their manifestations and implications rendered worse and more severe by the abolition of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

        Equally important are the roles of ex-military personnels in both army and society, and how they can bring about positive change. In that regard, and given your experience and expertise, I would like to invite you to peruse my latest post entitled “A Tale of Two Soldiers: Pacifism, Activism or Armed Resistance in the Face of Aggression?“, whose highly topical areas, analyses and questions bear a great deal of relevance and urgency, considering the dilemmas of various contests and conflicts across the domestic, regional and international fronts in numerous parts of the world. This special post is available at

        𒅌👨‍✈️👮⌐╦̵̵̿ᡁ᠊╾━ A Tale of Two Soldiers: Pacifism, Activism or Armed Resistance in the Face of Aggression? 💨💥╾━╤デ╦︻ඞා🕊️☮️📢🪧💪🛡️

        Yours sincerely,
        SoundEagle🦅

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

Leave a reply to Susana Cabaço Cancel reply